Earbud wearin' fool

This morning I joined the throngs of jogging, dork walking, rollerblading, dog-escorting fools with mp3 players dangling from their ears. I bought an mp3/fm radio player yesterday, set my alarm clock and strutted to the morning news bright and early before work today. I was a little self-conscious, like a wanna-be wearing the same new brand of jeans as everyone else, trying to fit in. I don't like to walk or skate alone so I usually go to the gym and read the New Yorker, but it's a shame to be inside during this sublime season. True, I'll fall behind on my subscription, but I can study what other people in the neighborhood are doing with their gardens.

Weeee HA!!!

Gonzales, not Rove, will be next

So, it's probably wishful thinking on my part to think that Rove would be next on the cut list. There's buzz that "Abu" Gonzales (thanks for the nickname, Jacabrooke) will be next to be thrown into the tank, and a list of possible replacements is being assembled, even as the White House continues to stand by him. Bush will try to keep Rove from testifying about the firing scandal, and may have to sacrifice Gonzales in the process.

Republican officials operating at the behest of the White House have begun seeking a possible successor to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, whose support among GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill has collapsed, according to party sources familiar with the discussions . . . "Democrats smell blood in the water, and (Gonzales') resignation won't stop them," said a well-connected Republican Senate aide. "And on our side, no one's going to defend him. All we can do is warn Democrats against overreaching."


But I still hold out hope for Rove's downfall.

With the scandal clearly not going away, Sampson then urged others at the department to try to get Cummins not to join other fired prosecutors in testifying on March 6. Cummins had warned officials that if called to Washington, he "would tell the truth about his circumstances" of being fired so Rove's operative, Timothy Griffin, could take over in Little Rock.

Amores

I opened my email this morning to find this note from my friend Pacho, whom I met up with Mexico City recently, and who knows well my great appreciation for this particular actor's talent, as well as my lust for his pulchritude:

"ken n joy were thrilled to recive your amores perroes by the way, talking of which i supose you recognise the guy with me in the foto...... love peter"

Afterwhich followed a photo of my friend with Gael Garcia Bernal at the Habana airport. Since he didn't send it in a format for me to share it with you here, I went online to find other pictures for us to dream over.

This is such a fantastic report from NPR this morning I just decided to copy the whole thing here - I've bolded the good stuff (to listen to it - and hear our commander-in-chief speaking Spanish - go to the NPR website):

By David Greene

Latin America Trip Not Entirely Business as Usual

March 14, 2007 · President Bush is wrapping up a week-long tour of five Latin American countries with his last stop in Mexico. NPR White House Correspondent David Greene has been following the president, and covering the news of the trip. Greene has also been taking note of some of the stranger moments along the way — and he wanted to offer a few observations.

Covering the commander in chief is not always the sexiest job. Except, apparently, when you're in Brazil. That country's president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, said that when it comes to intense, ongoing trade talks, he just wants to find that spot where everyone's satisfied.

"We're moving on solid ground to find a chance for the so-called G-point," Silva said.

That was the English translation for Brazil's leader, who has been known to spice up a news conference. Brazil was President Bush's first stop. And evidently, he was pretty hungry after the trip down.

"So, Mr. President, it has been a great first meeting here," Bush said. "I appreciate the fact that you're about to buy me lunch. I'm kind of hungry. Looking forward to eating some of that good Brazilian food."

But he may not have been quite satisfied with the Brazilian fare, because when he got to Uruguay, and met up with the president there, Mr. Bush still seemed a little peckish.

"I appreciate your willingness to cook some Uruguayan beef," he said. "You've told me all along how good it is, and after we answer a few questions, we're about to find out."

Uruguay, get ready. The White House chef might be calling soon to get some of your food on the menu.

"It turns out Uruguay produces a fantastic blueberry," Mr. Bush said later.

But nothing seemed to excite the president as much as the lettuce in Guatemala. Mr. Bush spent time in a small village, loading crates of lettuce onto a truck. He proclaimed this stop one of the special moments of his entire presidency.

"It was really, really fun," he said.

Maybe the president was day-dreaming about the lettuce when he came to talk to reporters. Surely, he didn't mean to say this.

"The American people would have been incredibly proud of watching our military folks dispense with basic health care needs to people who needed help," Bush said.

Clearly he meant that the U.S. military is offering health care. Because he said if Guatemalans, for example, needed eye glasses, they might be able to turn to U.S. military personnel.

"Or you have a perpetual tooth ache and somebody shows up, in this case in military uniforms, and says, how can I help," he said.

But there were times on this trip when Mr. Bush seemed a little cranky. At another stop, he was talking about Iraq, and a regional conference on how to stabilize it. And he didn't exactly praise the U.S. officials who were there. He said for the next conference, he's sending Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

"In other words, it's a step up in — I'm not dissing anybody, but it's a step up in the pay grade, let's put it that way," he said.

Mr. Bush was also able to turn to his usual punching bag — the press. All week, reporters kept asking him about Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's leader, who was trying to upstage Mr. Bush during his visit. The president refused to answer. He wouldn't once say Chavez's name in public. White House officials kept telling reporters they were making too big a deal out of Chavez, and should be focusing on Mr. Bush's agenda. And at one point Mr. Bush declared: "We welcome a free press — most of the time."

In fact, in a session with reporters in Guatemala, Mr. Bush tried to bring things to an abrupt close. But maybe that's because something else was on his mind.

"This will be your last question, Mr. President, and then we can start thinking about dinner, la cena," Bush said. "Que vamos a comer?"

A television reporter was ready to ask that last question. But she was forced to just stand there. The president of Guatemala, Oscar Berger, took Mr. Bush's comment about dinner to mean he wanted to hear about the menu, right there, in the middle of the press conference.

"Tortillas," Berger said.

"Tortillas? Que bueno," Bush replied.

Even the translator jumped in to help.

"We have tortillas with guacamole and beans," the translator said.

"Con el muerso, hoy," Bush said.

(I think that last bit should have been transcribed, "con almuerzo hoy.")

Throwing Rove to the Sharks?

With the latest revelations about White House involvement in the political firings of those eight U.S. attorneys comes more proof of the authortarian ambitions of the President. We've seen Libby get thrown to the sharks in an effort to protect Rove. Back in January, Jason Leopold and Marc Ash wrote in a Truth Out report:

Thus, Cheney's notes would have read "not going to protect one staffer and sacrifice the guy this Pres. asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others." The words "this Pres." were crossed out and replaced with "that was," but are still clearly legible in the document.

The reference to "the meat grinder" was understood to be the Washington press corps, Wells said. The "protect one staffer" reference, Wells said, was White House Political Adviser Karl Rove, whose own role in the leak and the attacks on Wilson are well documented.

Furthermore, Cheney, in his directive to McClellan that day in September 2003, wrote that the White House spokesman needed to immediately "call out to key press saying the same thing about Scooter as Karl."

Cheney was pissed about his having to sacrifice Libby for Karl, but went along with it to protect the President. Since the sharks continue to circle, they seem to be willing to throw another piece of food into the drink to forestall their own inevitable demise.

The White House acknowledged on Sunday that presidential adviser Karl Rove served as a conduit for complaints to the Justice Department about federal prosecutors who were later fired for what critics charge were partisan political reasons.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Rove had relayed complaints from Republican officials and others to the Justice Department and the White House counsel's office. She said Rove, the chief White House political operative, specifically recalled passing along complaints about former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and may have mentioned the grumblings about Iglesias to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

100 Worst Movies

I just went through the list of the 100 worst-reviewed movies of all time on Rotten Tomatoes, what they call the "worst of the worst." I have to believe there are plenty missing from that list, especially since most (if not all) on the list have been released in the past five or so years. "A Walk in the Clouds" is not listed, for example, nor is "Far and Away," which is far and away one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The first time I saw "Con Air" I thought it was at least in the top 10 worst films, but on second viewing I realized it is fabulously over the top campy.

I have been known to enjoy a bad movie. My rock 'n roll lifestyle requires a certain amount of couch time. It's hard for me to define what makes a bad movie good. But I once watched - and got a kick out of - a movie about skate board gangs. You know the kind of 80s movie in which there is at least one guy who dresses in wild pants (think zubbas) and wears a pork pie hat. I can tell you that in our movie collection we have "Big Trouble in Little China," "Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey," "Point Break" and "All The Right Moves" (that one I watched again last weekend, and they are so proud of the really bad 80s music that at the end they role the music credits first, before the acting credits).

So I went through this list of movies to see if any of my favorite bad movies were listed. Like just about any Keanu Reeves movies, or "Robin Hood," the Kevin Costner version (Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Notingham is not to be missed!). They were not. But there were a few listed that I have seen at least partially. They were indeed bad, and not good bad.

"A Night at the Roxbury" I know I have seen some of. "Kangaroo Jack" I think I saw on t.v. or maybe on a plane. I know I saw "I Know What You Did Last Summer," which is not on this list, but I can't remember if I saw the sequel, "I Still Know . . . ." Freddie Prinze, Jr. is in that one, and he appears in at least four on this "worst" list, to prove that looks and provenance only get you so far.

My girlfriend, Kate, rented Madonna's version of "Swept Away" for us to watch together on a sleepover night, which surprised me because she has such great taste. It was pretty bad but we laughed a lot. And I think I rented "Mod Squad" with Giovanni Rabisi, who kills me as Ralph on "My Name is Earl." It was bad in a formulatic kind of way, but not one of the worst I've subjected myself to.

I didn't recognize many of the others, and the ones I did you couldn't have paid me to see, like "Baby Geniuses" and "Baby Geniuses 2" and "Norbit" and just about any of the horror flicks listed. So, yes, the "worst of the worst" list covers some pretty bad movies, in my opinion.

On another note, we got through about an hour of "The Departed" last night before bedtime. I am still pissed off that "Goodfellas" didn't win best picture, and since then I put no stock in the Oscar picks. But I was happy for Scorsese to finally get the recognition he deserves. Still, I can't believe the Martin Sheen or Markie Mark characters haven't figured out that Matt Damon is the rat - he was the only one to use his cell phone during that video stakeout, and Sheen was standing right there! These guys call themselves detectives? And how in the hell did Leo get so close to Nicholson to become one of his right-hand guys in less than a year? Defies logic. I was just starting to appreciate Matt Damon's acting chops but his performance here is nothing special. We'll finish watching it tonight; I can't wait to see how it gets wrapped up.

Big Balls in Cowtown

Deb and Paul, Pat and I had a drink at the VFW bar and then drove to another bar where we were told we could get some food. The four of us had just seen Ricky Skaggs in concert at Grand Casino in Mille Lacs. Ricky's band is the tightest in blue grass, and they gave a high energy performance, from which we were still buzzing with booze and conversation.

The second spot was in Isle, a few miles off, aptly called Buzzy's. Inside the door stood three or four giant men, at least 6 feet 4 inches and 300 pounds each. Bulging arms hanging from beer barrel chest and shoulders. We headed toward some seats at the bar when I heard one of them say something about shots to the bartender. I asked what kind of shots, thinking we'd be included in the round. The guy turned around and says something like hey, how's it going, but didn't offer any info about the shots. I started to walk away when he grabbed my arm and said "hey, my buddy's got the biggest pair of balls, would you like to see them?"

I tried to keep my expression as bland as possible, trying not to smile. My companions were standing around me, us and the giants. The guy says to his friend, "show her your balls." He must have remembered his manners at this point and turned to Pat to ask him if it was OK for his friend to show me his balls, to which Pat said something to the effect that I was free to see them if I wanted to. Deb, who wasn't planning to engage in conversation with these guys, mumbled something like, "I've gotta see this."

His friend then reached into his jeans and rummaged around, kind of like the scene in "Zoolander" when Owen Wilson prepares to remove his underwear without removing his pants. I thought this was all for show and figured he expected us to stop him. What he was doing was wrapping his balls around his penis such that when he pulled them out, his penis would stay hidden, shy guy that he was.

Keep in mind, this guy was so tall that his crotch was almost eye level to me, and when he pulled out those balls, I had a pretty up-close and personal vantage point. They were huge, at least the size of tennis balls. As if this presentation were not enough, he proceeded to lick his middle finger and wipe it on one of those taught sacks.

We waited until we were out of range to double over laughing. We asked the bartender if this was standard entertainment, and he said "more often than we'd like." Just when you think you've seen it all . . . .

Scooter Review

Here's some world reaction, in a audio clip from NPR program "The World"'s Lisa Mullins.

And the New York Times reported today about the buzz about a possible pardon, including how Wall Street is handling the news:

Some legal experts believe that any appeals will take so long that the issue of a pardon may outlast the 2008 campaign, minimizing the political risks to Republicans and President Bush.

Meanwhile, the online futures exchange Intrade.com has offered Libby pardon futures.

“There’s good interest in the market already,” John Delaney, the Intrade chief executive, said by telephone from Dublin. He said traders so far had collectively predicted a 23 percent chance of a pardon by the end of 2007 and 63 percent by the end of President Bush’s term.

(Once you go to the Intrade link, look toward the right under "Scooter Libby Pardon Contract."

Wonder

It's ironic that conservatives, including the Bush administration, have so demonized and convinced the public to distrust the mainstream media, especially the media elites like the New York Times and CBS, while at the same time successfully using them to disseminate their war-mongering, hegemonic message.

Say "No" to New Coal Plants

This is from a letter sent to the Pioneer Press yesterday that I'm hoping will be published this week:

Coal-burning power plants are the biggest producers of greenhouse gases that cause global warming. Yet, federal and state governments are funding new coal gasification plants, such as the Mesaba Energy Project in Taconite, Minn. The project proposes to use “clean” coal technology that will have lower CO2 emissions than traditional plants, but there are no good examples to prove that assertion. Pawlenty has agreed to have the state help fund Mesaba, increasing not just property taxes but also our contribution of greenhouse gases and our exposure to airborne and water pollutants - mercury, sulfur dioxide, soot particles, etc. Water used to cool the plants will eventually be dumped into the Mississippi, from which many of us get our drinking water, and increased particulate matter in the air will exacerbate respiratory conditions. “Clean” coal is antiquated technology gussied up with dubious promises.

God was right

I think god was right when she sent Michele "Fool for Christ " Bachmann to Washington. Her election to the U.S. House got her out of Minnesota and into a crowded room where she can't do as much damage.

A sad, sad day

“A Total Rollback Of Everything This Country Has Stood For”: Sen. Patrick Leahy Blasts Congressional Approval of Detainee Bill

AMY GOODMAN: You gave an example, Senator Leahy, when you talked about what would happen here. And, I mean, even the fact that “habeas corpus” is in Latin, I think, distances people. They don’t quite understand what this is about.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: “Bring the body.”

AMY GOODMAN: You gave a very -- sorry?

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: “Bring the body.”

AMY GOODMAN: You gave a very graphic example. You said, “Imagine you’re a law-abiding lawful permanent resident. In your spare time you do charitable fundraising for international relief agencies that lend a hand in disasters.” Take that story from there, the example you used.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: You send money. You don’t care which particular religious group or civic group it is. They’re doing humanitarian work. You send the money. It turns out that one of them is giving money to various Islamic causes that the United States is concerned about. They come to your house. Maybe somebody has called into one of these anonymous tipster lines, saying, “You know, this Amy Goodman. I’m somewhat worried about her, simply because she’s going -- and I think I’ve seen some Muslim-looking people coming to her house.” They come in there, and they say, “We want to talk to you.” They bring you downtown. You’re a legal alien, legal resident here. And you say, “Well, look, I’ve got my rights. I’d like to talk to a lawyer.” They say, “No, no. You don’t have any rights.” “Well, then I’m not going to talk to you.” “Well, then now we’re twice as concerned about you. We’re going to spirit you down to Guantanamo, and we’ll get back to in a few years.” And, I mean, that could actually happen under this. And these are not far-fetched ideas, as the professor knows. He’s seen similar things.

And with that, and I would love to continue this conversation, unfortunately I’ve got to go back to my day job, back to the judiciary. I think this is going to go down as one of those black marks in the Congress. You know, I wasn’t there at the time, but virtually everybody voted for the Tonkin Gulf resolution. When I came to the Senate, you couldn’t find anybody there who thought that was a good idea. They knew it was a terrible mistake. You had members of congress supported the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II. Everybody knows that was a terrible mistake now. That day will come when everybody will look at this and say, “What were we thinking?”

AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Leahy, thanks very much for joining us. We only have about 30 seconds. Michael Ratner, president of Center for Constitutional Rights, your final comment on this.

MICHAEL RATNER: This was really, as the senator said, probably the worst piece of legislation I’ve seen in my 40-year career as a lawyer. The idea, and even the example Senator Leahy gave, of someone being picked up, you don’t need anything. The President can decide tomorrow that you, Amy, or me, or particularly a non-citizen, can be picked up, put in jail forever, essentially, and if you're a non-citizen in Guantanamo or anywhere else in the world, you never get a chance to go to court to test your detention. It’s an incredible thing, and any senator who voted for this, in my view, is essentially guilty, guilty, guilty of undermining basic fundamental rights and may well be guilty of war crimes, as well.

do you want lots and lots of pie or would you like a kidney infection

Stevens' Net Neutrality Poll Down The Tubes Jason Lee Miller Staff Writer Published: 2006-09-20 Ted Stevens thinks we're stupid. Trying to put this Net Neutrality debate to rest in the Senate, Stevens (R-AK) distributed the results of a "bipartisan" poll indicating that the vast majority of Americans would rather watch more TV than have a neutral Internet. Neither Stevens nor the pollsters mention that Verizon paid $60,000 for the poll, or that the questions were phrased using classic push-poll tactics. In fact, the poll didn't seem to even be about the "series of tubes" that comprises "an internet." The poll questions centered around cable TV choice and didn't mention anything related to Net Neutrality until the end of the poll. There was mention of a Consumer Bill of Rights, which would guarantee full access to legal Internet content, matching language already in Stevens' telecom bill. Opponents have said the "bill of rights" doesn't provide any meaningful protection of Net Neutrality. The majority of respondents agreed that the bill of rights was important, but it was last on the list of important issues when compared to making sure nobody dies because communications networks don't work, or ensuring that poor kids get an education, or getting more TV channels, or making sure the blind and deaf can "participate more fully in the modern information economy." But the real kickers came at the end of the poll. When the 800 respondents were asked if they'd heard of Net Neutrality (this is the first mention of the concept in the poll), about 7 percent had heard of it. Does this mean that Net Neutrality is a non-issue because America doesn't care? Or does it mean that the pollsters at Glover Park Group and Public Opinion Strategies conducted a biased, telecom-funded poll, asking people that know nothing about the issue how they felt about it? The last question tops it off: Which of the following two items do you think is the most important to you: Delivering the benefits of new TV and video choice so consumers will see increased competition and lower prices for cable TV OR Enhancing Internet neutrality by barring high speed internet providers from offering specialized services like faster speed and increased security for a fee Well, since you put it that way…more TV sounds a lot better than slow Internet and bad security. Turns out 73 percent of respondents agreed. "The rest of the questionnaire is similarly structured along the lines of 'do you want lots and lots of pie or would you like a kidney infection'," writes Matt Stoller. "What's particularly amazing is that 17 percent of the respondents chose the kidney infection," answers Tim Karr at SaveTheInternet.com, where 1.3 million people have heard of Net Neutrality, compared to Stevens' 800 people who missed part of a Seinfeld rerun to answer the poll. A rough translation of the questions: 1. Do you like TV? 2. Would you like to watch more TV? 3. Which is better: cheap TV or expensive TV? 4. What if your TV breaks? Would you like someone to fix it? 5. Do you like good TV or bad TV? 6. Put these in order from most important to least important: a.) helping people stay alive b.) more TV c.) healing the blind d.) slow Internet, less TV, and killing people Stevens and company interpreted the results to mean that "onerous Net Neutrality regulations" would interfere with the nation's TV watching and therefore should be put to rest. This poll is the next in a string of recent dirty tricks attempted by bridge-to-nowhere-but-a-series-of-tubes Stevens. The octogenarian telecom-funded senator in charge of rewriting telecommunication laws recently tried to sneak a vote while opposition was away for the August recess, and secretly put a hold on a bill that would make federal funding more transparent. But it's not all so bleak. Rumor has it that Stevens plans to retire soon. But then, who will protect our TV?

Life After Net Neutrality

In his article Replaced by a Chimp: Life After Net Neutrality, in The Nation online edition this week, Jeffrey Chester argues that, if Network Neutrality protections are not included in Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens’ telecom bill, which may yet be put to a vote by the senate this year, not only will the public interest of equal access to information, goods and services be undermined, but the network will become little more than another conduit for mainstream, low-brow “infotainment.”

The global media landscape has become fragmented at the same time that media power, that is the power of media outlets, has become consolidated. In 1983, 50 companies controlled 90% of the media. Today it's 10 companies. That equal access to the data housed and shared on the Internet is at risk directly threatens the democratic value of the World Wide Web. But by allowing corporate interests to control that access, through tiered pricing, we further erode the principles of equal access to information for all. Chester writes, “The Stevens bill not only proposes to scuttle network neutrality rules but also undermines key policies designed to insure community influence over how broadband networks serve the public interest . . .” Not surprisingly, the Bush administration and much of the GOP are arguing for less government control, not more. But if the services of telecom companies aren’t regulated, it’s likely that the greater proportion of information and messages crisscrossing the network would do what autocratic government media do: support the administration’s goals, which these days lean toward suppression of information rather than disseminating it. The telecom companies are spending piles of money, mostly heaped on those in the ruling party, to defeat Net Neutrality. This point is clearly stated in the article: “Stevens's talking points are actually being scripted--and paid for--by phone industry lobbyists.” What do the telecoms have to gain? One can surmise it would be mountains of money. And what would the ruling party gain from telecoms having more control over levels of access? For the administration, it’s a consistent message, which seems to include the persistent admonition not to change our way of life, to keep everything status quo. The status quo doesn’t appear to include protecting the current rights and protections afforded by the constitution, no, it seems to mean preserving the right of comfortable complacency. Remember, after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, we were encouraged to go back to our daily lives, get back to the mall. “Such dumbing-down of broadband is more likely in the absence of network neutrality rules. Expect media conglomerates and advertisers to flood our broadband networks with chimps selling beer and ketchup-colored clowns pushing fast food.” To this end, global mass media is more efficient than local, community-produced media. And it’s no coincidence that the telecoms lobbying for the authority to set their own usage fees are the same cabal that supplied the administration’s security agency with the phone and email records of their customers earlier this year.

The representatives who are reaping the cash bonuses are hardly of one mind (or even one party). Republicans may not all have the same motivations as the administration, but they are acting from the same playbook: they want to continue as the ruling party. “The GOP--including the White House--is still pushing hard to kill network neutrality. For example, at a hearing last week before Stevens's committee on his renomination for another term, FCC chair Kevin Martin came out in defense of the big cable and phone companies. The FCC chair said he thought it was fine for Verizon and others to begin charging extra fees to those content providers that want to be placed on faster Internet lanes.”

It’s clear that at least one outcome of media consolidation is global, social hegemony, assurance of complicity of the public at large in the objective of the ruling class. The message that society receives from the Power’s That Be comes in many forms: news, advertisement, “infotainment,” etc, and the media corporatocracy controls most outlets. It’s a tragedy that the Internet, perhaps the last public commons, may be incorporated into that entity (no pun intended). Hugo Chavez described what many believe is the sinister objective at the UN on Wednesday: “The government of the United States doesn't want peace. It wants to exploit its system of exploitation, of pillage, of hegemony through war.”

Blood from a turnip

Amazing, an insurance company selling ersatz malpractice insurance to CIA agents to cover their asses if they are sued for torturing detainees. Guess who ultimately picks up the tab for these policies?

Worried CIA Officers Buy Legal Insurance

Plans Fund Defense In Anti-Terror Cases

By R. Jeffrey Smith

Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 11, 2006; Page A01

CIA counterterrorism officers have signed up in growing numbers for a government-reimbursed, private insurance plan that would pay their civil judgments and legal expenses if they are sued or charged with criminal wrongdoing, according to current and former intelligence officials and others with knowledge of the program. Read on . . .

Dismembered

Hahahahahaaah! I wish that weren't funny, or that it wasn't an issue in current events that a cartoonist was compelled to characterize. I wish a lot of things, as we all do these days, of course.

Looks like the talk about Iraq being a staging ground for military forays (doesn't 'forays' make it sound fun?) into Iran, etc, wasn't all that cynical. After all, we had to pull out of Saudi Arabia after the attacks of 9/11/01, which was what bin Ladin (and possibly the House of Saud) was aiming for, and if we're gonna shine the light of Democracy across the Middle East, we need a base of operations.

If you haven't yet picked up the Guardian muckraker Greg Palast's book, "Armed Madhouse," you must. I was up later than I should have been reading and even laughing - thankfully, or I would have been crying. He's a bit of a ranter and kinda hard to follow in some of his narratives, but he sure has uncovered a tangled web, and man-oh-man is our government up to some shit. They can't even agree on what their mission is in the Middle East; it's unfortunate they agree we oughta be there. With the "madhouse" chock full of megalomaniacs, it makes sense they would all have their own ideas about how to run the world.

Rob Brezsny says:

Philosopher William James proposed that if our culture ever hoped to
shed the deeply ingrained habit of going to war, we'd have to create a
moral equivalent. It's not enough to preach the value of peace, he said.
We have to find other ways to channel our aggressive instincts in order to
accomplish what war does, like stimulate political unity and build civic
virtue.

Astrology provides a complementary perspective. Each of us has the
warrior energy of the planet Mars in our psychological make-up. We can't
simply repress it, but must find a positive way to express it. How you
might go about this project?

Insomnia

I haven't been sleeping well for what seems like months. I wake up around 3:00 am, and, realizing I am wide awake, read for a little before trying to go back to sleep. Then, if I can go back to sleep, I often feel worse because I get into that deep dreaming sleep and then have to be yanked out it. Or, I start to fall asleep at around 5:00 am, right around the time the cat starts crying to either get fed or be let outside. It's such torture, too, even though I am getting more reading done, because I am an 8-hour a night girl - otherwise I just don't feel right. It makes it hard to keep up an exercise routine, and when I get home, I just don't want to do anything but sit on the couch and watch t.v. I have tried several things, only herbal, and they do help sometimes. Keep your fingers crossed for me tonight.

Particles of Truth

I watched an intriguing movie this weekend, a little indie written, directed, produced and starring Jennifer Elster. I watched it because I just finished the final season of Queer as Folk, and wanted to see some more of Gale Harold, aka Brian Kinney. It's a really original story, very well-written and acted, and, since I'm still thinking about it days later, I guess it's also memorable, unlike so many other movies these days. Oh, yeah, it was called "Particles of Truth."

Other movies of note viewed recently:

Cowboy del Amor, which was a Netflix recommendation. A documentary about a cowboy cupid who sets up lonely American men with lonely Mexican woman for possible marriage. The guy is a real character, and the movie is a hoot!

Marilyn Hotchiss' Ballroom Dancing and Charm School. Robert Carlysle of Full Monty fame is a grieving widower who finds life and love again at the D&C School. Has a cast chalk full of great actors, like Marissa Tomei (love her, see The Guru, among other things), Cameron Manheim, Donny Wahlberg, John Goodman, Sean Astin and many more great character actors you'll recognize. You'll also learn something about dancing, and the current instructor, Marianne (?) (Mary Steenbergen) Hotchiss, daughter of Marilyn, articulates well the bliss that comes in dancing, something about magenta tones, wish I had written it down.

Everything is Illuminated. I liked the title, and I knew it was a best selling book first, but I was a little turned off when I found out it was yet another story about survivors of nazi brutality, but it turned out to be lovely, a little different than the rest, and well-acted by a mostly unknown cast - except Elijah Wood as the lead.

Mad Hot Ballroom. Saw that one a while ago but still makes me smile thinking about it. Along those same lines - movies with kids I actually liked - was Spellbound. Those are both documentaries, maybe that's why they were tolerable, the kids were real, not overly precocious or adorable.

Mr. and Mrs. Iyer. An Indian movie that was slightly corny (in true Bollywood fashion) but beautifully written and not too preachy.

I love movies with dancing in them, and recently I bought my very own copy of Strictly Ballroom, and Dirty Dancing ("Nobody puts Baby in a corner!") I would also consider buying Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights - great dancing in an otherwise lame movie. I got Brokeback Mountain as soon as it came out on DVD and when mom was here we watched it with subtitles; I have to admit I got some of the dialogue I'd missed the first couple times.

The House Guest

I am feeling very low today. The thought of Bush and his posse getting their hands on Cuba; the likely commission of ballot fraud in the next election; having brought down the world trade centers to create a neo-con revolution, or at the very least, having used the attack to carry out their agenda; the immoral wars in Iraq and Lebanon; the possiblity of journalists and activists being targeted via phone and email tapping and then accused of abetting terrorists so they can be rounded up and thrown into Halliburton's state-side internment camps; the inevitability of rapid climate change and ecosystem failure; the slow rebuilding of poor neighborhoods in disaster zones like the gulf coast; the potential demise of an equal-access Internet; the outright unfairness of life; the return of my hot flashes; and the fact that Americans are so goddamn ignorant to all of this, really makes me want to cry.

I haven't posted lately because I've just not had anything constructive to say. Let's face it, the world is going to hell in a handbasket. But I don't want to get bogged down in the negative completely, I've been working on my own evolution, and keeping my eyes open for opportunities to have a positive effect, I haven't wanted to slog around in the shit that is current affairs and then blog about it.

So, like I said, I am blue this morning, and then this arrived in my inbox, from Rob Brezsny's Astrology Newsletter:


"The Guest House"

by Jelaluddin Rumi,
translated by Coleman Barks in his book *Essential Rumi*


This being human is a guest house.
Every morning a new arrival.

A joy, a depression, a meanness,
some momentary awareness comes
as an unexpected visitor.

Welcome and entertain them all!
Even if they're a crowd of sorrows,
who violently sweep your house
empty of its furniture,
still, treat each guest honorably.
He may be clearing you out
for some new delight.

The dark thought, the shame, the malice,
meet them at the door laughing,
and invite them in.

Be grateful for whoever comes,
because each has been sent
as a guide from beyond.


That really helped (I'm not being sarcastic). I have a different attitude already, and the sun is even coming out! Doesn't it make you feel like singing??